West Virginia Democrat. [volume] (Charles Town, W. Va.) 1885-1890, 1887-07-15

to Minea' s house and stole the let.
ter. l wrote Mr.. Camden to return
IL 70 .Linear's wife by mail, which
he did. McGraw gave me check
tr.r $50 and afterwards put $40 in
my pocket while was in fit in Mr..
Camden's room.
The Grafton Standard Enterprise
makes this reply:
The DEMOCRAT publishes what
pnrports to be the testimony of Shell
ton Roger in the late Minear inves-
tigation, and vet knew, or by the
exercise of very ordinary intelii-
gence could have known, that Mr..
Roger TESTIFIED TO NO SUCH STUFF.
The DEMOCRAT knows that Mr.. Re-
ger over his own signature, IN ipsis-
simis rer6iS, has denied this report
ed testimony as absolutely untrue.
We thought we could trust Mr.
Dawson's report of the evidence; he
was present and heard Roger testify;
Mr.. Dawson was member of the
committee. We expect it will be
found that Roger did testify exactly
as reported. We never heard of any
publication by Roger to the contra
~. Two questions are presented:
l. Did he testify as reported?
,. Did he testify to the truth?
Roger was under oath before the
committee. Does the Enterprise
say that he committed perjury?
Dawson's report of the evidence
agrees with the statement of it that
was furnished at the time to the
Wheeling papers by their cores
pOndents in Charleston.
The Registers Charleston letter
for May 1st, was as follows:
Shelton Roger testified that he OBJ
tanned copy of the (Scofeld) let
ter and Immediately reported to u.
S. Collector of Internal Revenue Nc
Graw and to Mr.. Camden, offering
a copy for Il consideration, where
upon he was told that only the orig
inal was worth anything. He again
visited Minear's home and purloin-
ed the letter. After its publication
he gave it to Senator Camden, di-
rected to Minear's wife. When ask
ed what he got for this letter, wit
ness said; Il received my expenses
and McGraw gave me check for $50
and at Washington let me have $40
more. At the time McGraw gave
me the $50 l had a spell in Camden's
room. Being stupid l did not know
McGraw gave me the money until l
found it IN my pocket next morning.
McGraw promised me an annual pass
over the b. & o. and to pay all eX-
Penses.
The InteHgeacer's Charleston let
ter of May 1st., was as follows:
The witness (Reger) obtained a
copy of the Scofeld letter, immedi
ately reporting to Collector McGraw
and to Camden, offering a copy
whereupon he was told that only the
original was worth anything He
again visited Minear's nome and
purlOined the letter. After the pub
lcatiOn of this letter witness said he
gave it to Senator Camden, directed
to Minear's wife. When asked what
he got for the letter, witness said,
IL received my expenses and Nc
Graw gave me a check for $50 and
at Washington let me have $50 more.
At the time McGraw gave me the
$50 | had spell in Camden's room
in Washington. Being stupid | did
not know McGraw gave me the mon
ev until | found it in my pocket
next morning. McGraw promised
me to pay all my expenses and an
annual pass over the b. Il o.
Here then are three distinct state
ments of Rogers testimony, and they
are made by three different persons.
His testimony was written down as
the words fell from his mouth. I'M
less he was correctly reported, these
statements would not thus agree,
one with the other. They all agree
as to his testimony on the three ma
terial points:
l. He took a copy to McGraw.
>. McGraw gave him check for $50
and afterwards gave him $50 more
in Camden's room and also promised
Il pass on the Il. & o. 3. McGraw
induced Roger to obtain the original
letter.
The public will judge whether we
knew. 'or, by the exercise of Il very
ordinary intelligence, could have
known. that Roger TESTIFIED TO NO
SuCu STUFF" We presume, the pub
lie will believe that Roger DID teSti-
fy precisely as we published. We